Biden says he does not regret Afghanistan withdrawal as Taliban take over more towns
- Thread starter Dwarvenhobble
- Start date
Various.
Primarily, destruction of both Soviet-neutral and Soviet-hostile factions within the PDPA, and installation of a Soviet-sympathetic administration in its place (the "non-aligned" position of the PDPA following the revolution was unacceptable to imperialists in the USA and USSR both, hence their rush to "intervene"). That's the chief one, and comes down to violent imposition of spheres-of-influence, just like the violent CIA interventions in various Central and South-American nations. In short: annihilation of what may have been a non-aligned socialist state, and creation in its place of a puppet to serve cold-war foreign policy interests.
Secondly, the suppression of a rebel movement which by then had taken over (geographically speaking) the majority of the country. Some of which owes itself to foreign influence; some of which owes itself to religious-nationalist movements; and some of which owes itself to a rebellion against political repression implemented by the PDPA.
Thirdly, destruction of Maoist groups within Afghanistan. A smaller proxy for the Sino-Soviet conflict.
Countless times throughout the Cold War did both the USA and USSR prioritise their own Cold War foreign policy sphere-of-influence building over the local issues of the countries in which they stuck their bloody imperialist spears.
Why do you defend the USSR invading a nearby sovereign country to put down ideologically opposed rebels and install a friendly autocratic regime but decry the instances of the US doing the same in Central and South America?
Your inner tankie is showing through mate...
This is just from today, no exaggeration it is on all his communications;
This is his header in every letter he shares on his burner/ban jump account;
Annnnnd this is going on literally right now, streaming his rally. The live music is...well, it's something.
Like I said, it is not improper for a former President to continue to use the honorific. See my earlier post where the White House and Biden refer to Obama as "President Obama".
Very on-brand that you keep leaving out that the CIA was behind the Mujahideen.
Taking a cue from modern pro-war news, I shall theorize that the Soviet Union was in Afghanistan for the sake of women's rights.
And yet they only "invaded" after the country had been overrun by US-armed religious fanatics.
Last edited:
Welp make or break for the people of Panjshir. Two ways history can go depending on what happens
So the Prague Spring doesn't count ? Or the Sino-Soviet conflict ? Or, slightly before the Cold War, what is with the Winter and Continuation wars ? What abot grabbing the Baltics and invading Poland ?
The answer is simple. Even simpler, houseman, than evading a ban on a website forum. So, to avoid any further time wasting, please allow me to communicate this in a language you're more likely to understand...
Last edited:
But its probably very improper if its said by a former president who pretends he's still the legitimate president and that the election was ''stolen'' from him.
Similarly, the US "only" invaded Iraq and Afghanistan after the religious fanatics there (also foreign-funded) made various aggressive moves. Yet I would imagine you would rightly recognise that those invasions and subsequent decades of occupation were not purely motivated a righteous wish to tackle these figures, eh?
This is how casus belli works. Why do you think the USSR purged their political opponents within the PDPA as soon as they arrived? If this was all about fighting insurgencies, why did they themselves overthrow and assassinate the head of state? Don't be naive.
Last edited:
Nobody has of yet offered any proof that Trump says or thinks that he is "still the legitimate president".
It seems likely that you and others here have been fooled by rumors and fake news into believing that this is true.
Houseman, that's because for all you claim at being logical and "following the evidence", your posts don't show that at all.
Why should people engage your demands when the inevitable result will be one of moving the goalposts, pretending to be unable to follow simple transitive proofs, or outright ignoring evidence you don't like?
What are you talking about. To this day Trump is still claiming he won the election. Just this week he said it be easy for Biden to resign over Afghanistan "because he was never legitimately elected anyway"
Claiming that the election was rigged, or stolen, or that he would have won, is a different claim than that he is "still the President".
All I'm asking for is a direct quote from Trump that he is "still the President", as was claimed by The Rogue Wolf in page 17. If no one can provide that, then I can't believe it.
No it isn't. In a democracy if you win the election then you are the legitimate president. If your opponent then steals this election from you and is installed without a mandate then he is not the legitimate president.
If Biden stole the election then he cannot be a legitimate president.
Let's say that I'm in the Olympics, in a competition against another person for the gold medal. I can claim that my opponent cheated and that they are not the legitimate winner. You could say that, since the gold medalist cheated, they should be disqualified, then I should have the gold.
Am I claiming to be an Olympic gold medalist? Or am I just claiming that I SHOULD be an Olympic gold medalist?
Please, all I'm asking for is a direct quote from Trump. It's okay if you personally believe that Trump believes that he is still President. But the only thing that will convince me is a direct quote.
Last edited: